Laserfiche WebLink
• 4.8.7 Sorinas and Seeps <br />PermR map M52 presents the location of springs and major seeps located at Trapper Mine. A detailed survey of <br />spring locations within and adjacent to Trapper Mine will be initiated in 1997. The goal of the survey will be to <br />inventory locations, establish histories, and obtain data from springs within the area. Appendix Q, Section XXXI <br />outlines sampling procedures and schedule to be followed. <br />There are two types of springs and seeps at Trapper. Natural-occurting springs are !hose in epstence before <br />mining or occur away tram areas of mining activity. Spoil springs and seeps are those that occur within the <br />mined area and are probabty a resuR of mining activities. <br />Table B-2 of the 1996 annua! report presents information concerning springs currently being monitored. This <br />table will be expanded as spring surveys for 1997 are performed. <br />Map M52 shows the location of the spoil and natural springs and seeps. The major natural springs that exist at <br />Trapper Mine are the West Buaard Spring, Coyote Spring, East Pyeatt Spring and the Flume Gulch Spdng. <br />The Coyote, East Pyeatt and Flume Gulch springs have produced the majority of the information on the Trapper <br />site. The Flume Gulch information has mainly been collected at surface water site S-1 and is representative of <br />spring water quality during base flow conditions. Also, significant additional information has been produced at <br />the East Pyeatt Spring site from the S-3 surface monitoring site during base flow conditions. Table B-2 of the <br />1996 annual report shows that the Coyote Spring maximum TDS has been appro>amately 2000 mgll. Historical <br />monitoring of the S-3 surface water site during base flow conditions shows that the TDS of the East Pyeatt <br />Spring water quality has been slightly less than 2600 mgA. The water quality measured in the East Pyeatt Spring <br />since mining has occurted in this area has been significantly less than 2000 mg/I. The base flow measurements <br />at surtace site S-1 shows that the ma>amum TDS observed in the Flume Gulch ground water is approximately <br />2400 mgll, which is very similar to the maximum value observed in the East Pyeatt Spring. None of the natural <br />springs at Trapper Mine seem to have been affected by mining. <br />• The main seeps and springs from the spoil aquifer observed at Trapper Mine are the Cottonwood Spring, Wapiti <br />r Spring and the Johnson Gulch Spring. A seep has also been observed in the No Name drainage but has not <br />lasted as long as the Cottonwood and Johnson Gulch Springs. The maxmum TDS observed in the Cottonwood <br />Spring is 1400 mgll. This is similar to the TDS observed in backfill aquifer well GD-3, located upgradient of this <br />site, but is slightly higher than the QR aquifer, located downgradient of the site, at well GD-2. It is possible that <br />the mining has affected the TDS in the Cottonwood and Wapiti Springs, but their values are well within the <br />natural concentrations of the ground water in this area. Limited data has been obtained from the No Name seep <br />due to the limited amount of time that discharge has occurted at this sRe.. The TDS in this seep has been fairly <br />similar to those observed in other natural springs in the area and, therefore, R cannot be determined whether the <br />mining has affected the water quality from this seep. <br />The TDS in the Johnson Gulch Spring is approximately 4000 mgll, which is significanty greater than the remain- <br />der of the spoil springs. The backfill aquifer near this spring has contained a similar TDS concentration at well <br />GF-7. The TDS in well GF-7 significantly decreased in 1996 indicating that the water quality in this backfill aqui- <br />fer may be improving. Similar decreases in TDS would be expected to be observed eventually in Johnson Gulch <br />Spring Mining has affected the total dissolved solids in Johnson Gulch Spring and TDS concentrations in this <br />sprir~ is lxpeded to decline gradually to below 3000 mgA. <br />Limited data exists on the remainder of the spoil seeps and springs due to the small amount of time that dis- <br />charge has occurted in these locations. Concentrations at each of these sites is well within the natural range of <br />concentrations. <br />Presently, the springs and seeps are monitored H the flow rate is greater than 5 gpm. This criteria is a useful <br />way of determining which springs and seeps to monitor due to the variability of these surtace discharges with <br />time. A specific list of springs to be checked each spring for flow will be developed after the detailed inventory in <br />1997. The East Pyeatt, Johnson Gulch and Cottonwood Springs are developing useful monitoring data with time <br />and will very likely be included in the monitoring list. The springs and seeps have generally only been used for <br />. livestock and wildlife watering. The use of the springs will be updated during the 1997 detailed inventory of the <br />springs. <br />4-248a <br />T2-~6 <br />~-/1q~98 <br />